The Production of Security

by Gustave de Molinari

"The introduction to this stunning work is by Murray Rothbard, who calls French radical Gustave de Molinari (1819-1912) the great innovator in the market provision of security. Indeed, he might be regarded as the first proponent of what is called anarcho-capitalism. Molinari was steeped in the old liberal worldview of Bastiat and hence was a dedicated champion of private property and free markets. But Molinari took matters further to argue that markets were also better at providing the service that the state claimed was its monopoly privilege: the provision of security itself. His singular contribution, then, was to lead us away from the false assumption of Hobbes that somehow the state was necessary to keep society from devolving into chaos. On the contrary, argued Molinari, the voluntary society is the source of order that comes from freedom itself. There is no contradiction or even tension between liberty and security. If free enterprise works well in one sector, it can work well in other sectors too. Molinari was indeed a radical but in the sense that foreshadowed the development of American libertarian thought: a radical for capitalism in all areas of life, which is another way of saying that he was a consistent champion of the fully free society. Perhaps there was a time when people could regard the government monopoly on police and courts as benign, part of the "night watchman" state advocated by the old-time classical liberals. But the march of the police state has changed that: we are more likely to understand that the state's "security" services are the gravest threat to liberty we face. In that sense, Molinari is the man of the hour."

Genres: Economics, Politics, Nonfiction, Political Science, Law

64 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1849

About the author

Gustave de Molinari was a Belgian political economist and classical liberal theorist.

Reviews

[Alex · Rating 3 out of 5]

I was very enthusiastic about this essay when I read Rothbards lavish praise for it. However, I don't think it has aged very well. The arguments put forth could be dismantled quite easily with the standard repertoire of statist clichés (public goods problem, externalities etc.), and there's now much better material available to prove that private security will work better than public one. What I give Molinari credit for is how clear his idea was: If the free market is better at providing goods than other economic systems, then the free market must also be better at providing the good of security. Prima facie, that's quite a strong argument, and also one that ultimately holds, but there are obvious objections to it that Molinari didn't address. Of course, he was the first one to put this idea forward, so I can hardly blame him for not anticipating the myriad of counter-arguments, some of which are lazy and completely detached from reality.

In my eyes, the best anarchocapitalist work on security is Blocks essay National Defense and the Theory of Externalities, Public Goods, and Clubs. The anthology it's printed in is in the link. I think it's an absolute must-read for libertarians, and a good followup after The Production of Security in that it specifically deals with objections to private security.

[Pedro Almeida Jorge · Rating 3 out of 5]

The first essay to extend the logic of supply and demand and market competition as sketched by the classical/french economists to the provision of security, without running away in terror. In fact, it only suggests that such logic can be applied consistently to the production of security and that the lack of competition is the cause and explanation for many disasters frequently occurring. However, I must admit I was expecting a bit more dissection and exploration of the internal logic of private defense provision.

Let's remember, though, that this was published as a short polemical article on a periodical journal on economics, so do not expect a full Treatise.

Most of the essay is about "preparing the ground" for this controversial position, in political-philosophical terms. Sometimes the reader will find that his conclusions are reached way too fast, or without due support. His critique of "divine-right monopoly" vs "communistic" organization of defense is interesting, though. At times he reminded me of La Boétie.

Also, his defense of the natural/voluntary emergence of society, subject to the logic of individual action, is a great way to start the essay and will please followers of Spencer and Mises.

[Dries Van thielen · Rating 5 out of 5]

Dutch version was slightly better! But still a great translation.

[GDM · Rating 5 out of 5]

Tremendo, gran descubrimiento este autor.
Gustave de Molinari, escritor e intelectual belga de hace dos siglos.
Este escrito le aseguró el desencanto de sus compañeros franceses, en los circulos que rodeaban al pensamiento laissez-faire, muy seguido en la Francia de esa época. Por considerarlo muy "radical".
Sienta las bases para lo que en el futuro, Murray Rothbard se encargará de especificar en "El manifiesto libertario" para hablar de la organización de seguridad.

Los ejemplos que usa para explicar con argumentos sólidos la postura que en ese momento tenía, son simplemente sublimes, sencillos y muy apropiados. Recuerdo en este momento su ejemplo de la sal, en el capítulo 5, con el objetivo de ejemplificar las circunstancias del monopolio y el comunismo. Y hace un ejercicio imaginativo en el capítulo 10.

Francamente recomendable, una lectura que no les llevará más de 30 minutos, pero que a los interesados del mundo libertario, anarcocapitalista o simplemente anarquistas, les dejará un buen sabor de boca. Abrazo.

[Nick · Rating 4 out of 5]

P1: In all cases free competition secures unto the consumer a higher quality service for a lower price than either monopoly or "communism" (democratic economic planning).

P2: The provision of security is a service.

Q: Quality of service will increase and price will decrease if monopoly or communistic provision of security is abolished, and replaced with free competition.

The rest of the book (or rather essay?) is basically an exposition of the above. Its rather basic, but that makes sense given that this was the first time this idea was ever written about (I think.) Its also entirely a-priori, only relying on one brief historical example- a footnote at the end to Adam Smith's description of competing courts in Britain.

That said, this is a pretty obvious concept and shouldn't need much exposition.

[Tvrtko Balić · Rating 4 out of 5]

I disagree with the author on numerous issues and I believe capitalism is outdated, but there is no denying that this is a well written book, I would actually be hesitant in recommending it in fear of converting someone to anarcho-capitalism.

[Ron Smith · Rating 5 out of 5]

A very good and easily read primer on free market security against the prevailing violence of state monopolies (monarchies) or communist takeovers (republics) of the security industry.

[Stephen · Rating 4 out of 5]

The first of its kind! Don't expect real answers in here, but historic nonetheless

[Sacha Valero · Rating 4 out of 5]

Gustave de Molinari lays down some compelling reasons for privatizing that most sacred of holy cows; security.

I know, I know, security is provided by the state. Always has always will. Why? Because it's why the state exists. Or so those who put their faith in the almighty state would have us believe.

Long before Rothbard was born Molinari proposed that security, like any other commodity, could be privatized and this would mean it would be better for the consumers of security. Police would be chosen by any given community for services they would render and cost. If they abused their clients, those clients would be free to fire them and choose another private police force.

For those of us that live in modern America police brutality is a rising threat. Police, as state agents, have qualified immunity so they cannot be personally prosecuted for any wrong doing while in uniform. Police routinely beat, harass, taze, and shoot people for little or no reason. They misread warrants and storm the wrong home, killing the occupant and nothing ever happens.

This is becoming more and more common as the police are more and more militarized. For this reason alone we should welcome the privatizing of security. At least on the issue of holding them to account.

Personally, I have an issue with cops and people who want to be cops. I don't trust them when they say they just want to “serve the public.” Maybe some of them do, sure. For the most part it's power they want and that doesn't go away when your main motivation is simply getting paid.

[Jos Nose · Rating 4 out of 5]

An investigative journey into the world of monopolies and security, with perspectives into iterative authority. To fully understand this, I’ll definitely need to read it a few more times (or hire an expert to tutor me), but regardless, a fantastic read into monopolistic and communistic governments.

[André · Rating 3 out of 5]

Gustave de Molinari's "The Production of Security" is an exploration of the concept of privatizing security, offering both insightful arguments and some notable shortcomings. Molinari's central thesis proposes that security services should be subject to market forces, and treated as commodities that can be provided more efficiently by private enterprises than by monopolistic state institutions.

On the positive side, Molinari presents a compelling case for the economic advantages of a free-market approach to security. He eloquently outlines how competition among private security providers would lead to improved efficiency, innovation, and cost-effectiveness, ultimately benefiting society as a whole. His ideas challenge conventional thinking and stimulate readers to reconsider the role of the state in providing security.

However, Molinari's work is not without its criticisms. One notable drawback is the lack of a detailed implementation plan. While he successfully argues the theoretical benefits of privatizing security, the book falls short in providing a clear roadmap for transitioning from state-provided security to a market-driven model. Readers may be left with questions about the practicalities and potential challenges of such a transition.

Additionally, Molinari's optimism about the ability of the market to regulate security services might be seen as overly idealistic. One may argue that the profit motive could lead to ethical concerns, with security providers prioritizing their financial interests over the well-being of society. Molinari's vision seems to assume a level playing field in which competition naturally leads to the best outcomes, overlooking potential pitfalls and unintended consequences.

In conclusion, "The Production of Security" offers a compelling vision of privatizing security, challenging conventional wisdom, and advocating for a market-driven approach. While the book raises important points, it leaves some practical aspects unaddressed and may oversimplify the complexities of transitioning from state to private provision of security.

[Ethan · Rating 5 out of 5]

Innovative, thought provoking, and logically consistent. These ideas are important, and billions of people are missing out by never happening to read them or give them a thought. Molinari was a Belgian political economist and a prominent voice of the French school of economics in the 1800s, a school which, like the Austrian school of economics later, embraced the subjective theory of value. Molinari's insight was thorough and consistent, in keeping with his contemporary Frederic Bastiat. In this book, Molinari anticipates the individualist, market-based and property rights-based anarchism which emerged in the 20th century, with its emphasis on a more efficient and more ethical set of institutions for governing society that puts more choice in the hands of the people for their own affairs. Many people of various identifications, from anarcho-"capitalists" to "socialist" left-wing market anarchists, have found a market for security to be a tremendously preferable organization of the security industry to the status quo of the monopoly corporations which we call governments. Regardless of the words you use for it, the ideas in this book unite them in their quest for a free society. Perhaps you will find truth in it too.

[Ryan Thornton · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book is a very well written book and can be read in less than an hour (which I just did!).
This book does not, in my opinion, cover how privatized police would work in enough detail (for that check out something like Murray Rothbard's "For a New Liberty) it mostly focuses on why security is not best as a monopoly by the state or run communistically (as it tends to be).
As economists have said time and time again, and it is instinctively known by many, monopolies are bad for consumers. Why, then, would it be appropriate to hand over one of the most important services of any society to monopolist known as the state?
This books answer is that it should not! And it does so in an enjoyable way.

[Sumajestad · Rating 4 out of 5]

Increíble, en tan poquitas páginas este artículo me abrió la cabeza y me hizo cuestionar varias cosas con las que Lysander Spooner me encendió la mecha. Pero Gustave De Molinari lo lleva mucho más allá y plantea el problema de la seguridad desde el plano de la ciencia económica, y como esta es monopolizada por el Estado, que de hecho es el principal y original monopolio sobre el que se erige la institución del Estado. Muy interesante, sobre todo sabiendo de que época es el autor, el anarcocapitalismo como idea era inexistente. Este artículo es la semilla para que muchísimos más años después venga Murray Rothbard, el cual aún tengo pendiente muchos de sus libros.

En síntesis: Extremadamente recomendable para TODOS, porque es una lectura muy fácil y muuuy corta.

[Dio Mavroyannis · Rating 3 out of 5]

Half hour read. Good fun, though I find his method of argumentation rather odd. There also a weird employment of the word "communism". Basically it's a book arguing by the laws of supply and demand and competition imply that competition necessarily decreases the prices of goods and the law should also apply to protective services.

[Yuki · Rating 5 out of 5]

Muito bom, ouvi o audiobook do erick trautvein no spotify (tem no youtube tambem)
Molinari é realmente um homem a frente de sue tempo, em 1848 escrever sobre a privatização do que os liberais consideram o imprivatizavel é simplesmente extraordinário. Recomendo a todos o audiobook ja que o livro tem uma linguagem simples e didática e é bem curtinho

[Jairo Fraga · Rating 4 out of 5]

Bem pequeno. Trata dos problemas relativos a achar que só a segurança está fora das leis econômicas, como se monopólio nessa área, ao contrário das outras, pudesse trazer benefícios, o que não é verdade

[Waldir F. Reccanello · Rating 4 out of 5]

Um impressionante retrato do início do pensamento anarcocapitalista, desruptivo e radical, que, mesmo não encontrando, à época, eco entre os grandes do liberalismo e do protolibertarianismo, revela a força e a solidez da corrente.

[Geir · Rating 5 out of 5]

The text left me wanting more.

[Han Tuzun · Rating 1 out of 5]

Arguments are not supported at all. My expectations from blog posts are higher on a subject like this.

[Alan Ribeiro · Rating 4 out of 5]

Interessante o ponto de vista de como seria se tirasse o monopólio da força do estado.

[Dakota · Rating 5 out of 5]

“The interests of the consumer of any commodity whatsoever should always prevail over the interests of the producer.”

[Pedro Faraco · Rating 4 out of 5]

Escrito em 1849 (há mais de 160 anos portanto!) este livreto é considerado por Murray N. Rothbard o primeiro texto "anarcocapitalista" ou "anarquista de livre mercado" da história da humanidade.

Molinari provoca o leitor questionando as razões pelas quais o senso comum considera que o provimento de segurança deve ser monopólio do estado. Apesar fazer uso de argumentos interessantes, considero que o o autor não analisou a fundo o funcionamento de agências de segurança concorrentes, o que teria ajudado a firmar seu ponto.

Porém, em alguns pontos Molinari é simplesmente brilhante, como no capítulo que expõe as equivalências entre os monopólios de qualquer sorte (que somente persistem com o uso da coerção estatal) e o comunismo. Outra parte memorável é quando o autor denuncia os riscos da demoracia, quando esta se torna a ditadura da maioria.

[Seburath · Rating 5 out of 5]

La seguridad pública es cara y de pésima calidad, justo como se puede esperar de cualquier servicio público, Molinari hace un trabajo increíble analizando este hecho, lo que es impresionante, si se toma en cuenta que: ¡Este libro fue escrito hace ~170 años!

¿Si todo servicio que esté expuesto a competencia mejora su calidad y disminuye su precio, porque la defensa sería distinta? Si este es el servicio esencial por excelencia, la exigencia por calidad debería ser máxima, el monopolio estatal es inaceptable.

[Zach Boyle · Rating 4 out of 5]

It refuted the idea that centralized force was a good idea, and convinced me on civil protection (everyday protection of property), but he did not touch on larger matters, such as criminal endeavors (murder, etc.). But considering he was merely trying to bring it to light, I would consider it a good work.

[Daniel · Rating 4 out of 5]

Short and easy read on why private production of security always beats state security based on a monopoly of force.